Some Things You Might Not Know About Asian Aesthetics Evaluating
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Special Issue: Some Things You Might Not Know about Asian Aesthetics Evaluating Indian Aesthetics Saam Trivedi Brooklyn College, City University of New York “…globalization is…the next big artworld idea…” - Noël Carroll1 Do the art and aesthetics of the four oldest human civilizations—those of Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq), Egypt, India, and China, all of which incidentally flourished long AMERICAN SOCIETY before such landmark dates in world history as 1066, 1607, and 1776—have anything to teach us today? More specifically, I focus here on classical Indian aesthetics and the rasa for AESThetics theory; leaving it to others with greater expertise in ancient Chinese, Egyptian and other An Association for Aesthetics, aesthetics to undertake similar projects. Does Indian aesthetics have anything of value and Criticism and Theory of the Arts modern relevance to us today, both generally and in the West? In what follows, I suggest that the answer to this question is in the affirmative. Volume 33 Number 1 SpriNg 2013 1. Exposition I begin by setting out some basic ideas of the rasa theory of classical Indian aesthetics as 1 Evaluating Indian Aesthetics, by Saam found in Bharata’s Natyasastra2—hereafter NS—an ancient Sanskrit text on dramaturgy the Trivedi precise dates of which we need not be much concerned with but which various scholars— 5 Contemporary Philosophical Aesthetics in who disagree about such things—place anywhere in time from the fifth century BCE to China: A Re-Reading of the Aesthetics No- the eighth century CE. Note in passing that it is not my purpose in this essay to engage in tion of Ganxing , by Eva Kit Wah Man comparative aesthetics, and so, for the most part, I will not compare ideas and passages in Bharata’s text with thoughts about drama and the other arts in Western aesthetics such 7 Japanese Aesthetics, by Carol Steinberg as, for example, in Aristotle’s Poetics; some might, in any case, doubt how far such a com- Gould and Mara Miller parison and contrast might go given that while we have the entire text of Bharata’s NS, we sadly do not possess all of Aristotle’s work. Note also that, for the most part, I will set 11 News from the National Office aside later commentators on Bharata (such as the tenth and eleventh century CE Kashmir Shaivite Abhinavagupta), for there is reason to think that many of these later writers may 11 Aesthetics News have given a religious and cosmological twist to what is at core an aesthetic theory and can be understood as such, quite apart from religion;3 here I disagree with writers such 11 Conference Reports as Susan Schwartz who suggests that the goal of Indian aesthetics is to facilitate religious transformation.4 Note too that while the rasa theory’s claims were originally about drama 12 Calls for Papers (which included dance and music as part of theatrical performances of ancient Indian 16 Upcoming Events plays) and literature understood broadly, over time they have also been extended to dance, sculpture, architecture, and music; claims about rasa probably cannot, however, 18 Active Aestheticians be extended outside the arts to cover such things as beauty in nature. In Memoriam 19 The central ideas of Bharata’s rasa theory of aesthetics can be found chiefly in chapters 6 and 7 of the NS (VI & VII). Bharata distinguishes ordinary, real-life psychological states (bhava) from aesthetic sentiments or emotions or flavors or relishes (rasa). There are forty- one psychological states of which eight are durable (sthayibhava) while the other thirty- three (which we need not be much concerned with) are transient even if complementary. It is these eight durable psychological states—love, laughter, compassion, anger, energy, aesthetics-online.org fear, disgust, and astonishment—that when presented in a play (or an artwork broadly) SPRING 2013 give rise to or develop into the eight rasas or aesthetic emotions or etc. that are associated with the psychological state represented: the flavors recognized in drama, as will be explained later, that involves experiencer must universalize their own emotion, transcending its both what is expressed on stage and also the audience’s uptake, and particularities so as to recognize the universalized emotion in the work. with which they have a one-one correspondence. The eight rasas Moreover, the psychological states portrayed infuse the meaning of are: erotic love (sringara), comic laughter (hasya), grief (karuna), fury the play in spectators, pervading them with words, gestures, and (raudra), heroic spirit (vira), fear (bhayanaka), revulsion (bibhatsa), representations. Also, as Eliot Deutsch6 points out, rasa is constituted and wonder (adbhuta). And of these eight rasas, four—erotic love, by the process of aesthetic perception, involving both the work and fury, heroic spirit, and revulsion—are considered original, the other an experience of it, and is not something that exists solely in the work four rasas arising from them; a mimicry of erotic love gives us comic (in an objectivist-formalist sense) nor solely in us (in a subjectivist- laughter, grief emerges from fury, heroic spirit yields wonder, while romantic-sentimentalist sense). The artwork controls or determines revulsion gives rise to fear. Note also that for any given play, one rasa rather than causes the response of the experiencer, and the imper- must predominate so as to give unity to the discourse, and the others sonality of its aesthetic content allows the work to be intersubjective if present must be subsidiary to it. even while its intensity also makes it highly individual. With regard to the psychological states, four sorts of things are dis- 2. Criticisms tinguished. The first is the determinant or external cause or stimulus (vibhava) of the psychological state, so in the case of erotic love, for Before examining what, if anything, we might learn from the rasa example, the stimulus might be the season or a flower or ornaments theory, here are some quick concerns. To begin with, the emotive theory or anything beautiful or desirable. The second is the consequent of literary and artistic meaning, more broadly, that we are offered is (anubhava), the immediate and involuntary reaction to the stimulus, too narrow, at least for us today. Not all literature and art is emotive so in our example, this might involve glancing coyly or mouthing or expressive of (or portrays) emotions and other mental states, and sweet words. The third thing is the deliberate or conscious reaction some is in fact purely formalist; nor is expression of mental states (vyabhicaribhava), which in the case of erotic love might involve some the sole aim of literature and art.7 To be fair to Bharata, though, let of the thirty-three transient, complementary states as languor or us focus on drama, which after all is the main subject of the NS. Here suspicion or jealousy. Finally, there is the total effect of the durable again there is experimental, short drama that need not be emotive or psychological state (sthayibhava)—love in this case—which dominates expressive; one example might be Samuel Beckett’s 35-second work the other three even as all four together make up the relevant rasa, “Breath” which has no characters, but even if this example does not which in our example would be erotic love. work, there is no reason in principle why there could not be purely formalist, experimental theater that is not expressive or emotive. All literary meaning, Bharata tells us, involves some kind of emotion or sentiment, thus giving us an emotive theory of literary and, more Here is a different worry. If writers such as M. Hiriyanna are right,8 broadly, artistic meaning. Rasa, we are told, arises or emerges from a then pleasure is represented in Indian aesthetics as the sole aim of combination of the psychological states, amongst other things, just art. But such a view of art is clearly too narrow, for art may also have as taste in food is the result of combining various condiments and other aims such as educational or socio-political ones. The Indian ingredients. The analogy with food here need not entail a view of context itself provides examples: the ancient Indian epic poems The cooking as an art-form, but it is worth noting nevertheless that like Ramayana and The Mahabharata not only afford pleasure but also most Sanskrit words, the word rasa has multiple meanings, including often give insights into moral issues and human character and emo- (amongst others) juice, sap; liquid; taste, flavor, relish; condiment; tions.9 Indeed, even the NS (I.111-3) itself sees drama—conceived as an object of taste; taste or inclination for a thing, liking, desire; senti- imitating the actions and conduct of people—as instructive through ment; and essence.5 its depictions of actions and psychological states and through its giving rise to rasa. Pursuing the analogy with food further, the NS claims that just as well-disposed people can taste and enjoy food cooked with many To turn to a different doubt, the NS specifies many elaborate rules kinds of condiments, likewise a cultured person (rasika) can experience about drama, pertaining to such things as hand gestures, bodily and relish rasa, as a final state of satisfaction, when they see dramatic movements, gaits, rules of prosody and different kinds of language, representations and expressions of the various psychological states metrical patterns, diction, modes of address and intonation, kinds of accompanied by words, gestures, and the like; the appeal to cultured plays, costumes, make-up, styles, and so on. These are often accom- persons here is reminiscent, of course, of the Humean notion of ideal panied by many neat—perhaps too neat and artificial—classifications critics and also similar notions of ideal or competent observers often and sub-classifications, reflecting the ancient Indian excellence at and appealed to in Western aesthetics.